Significant Prognostic Factors Influencing the Survival Difference of Oral Tongue Squamous Cell Carcinoma.
Journal
Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open
ISSN: 2169-7574
Titre abrégé: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101622231
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2021
Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
08
07
2021
accepted:
28
08
2021
entrez:
29
10
2021
pubmed:
30
10
2021
medline:
30
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma is the most common malignancy in the oral cavity. Overall survival varies across many countries, and poor prognosis is prevalent in developing countries, including Thailand. Our study aimed to identify prognostic factors that affected survival for oral tongue cancer in Thailand. We performed a retrospective study of 183 patients diagnosed with oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma between January 2012 and December 2016 and who underwent multidisciplinary treatment. The disease stage was classified by tumor-nodes-metastasis (TNM) staging system. The survival outcome was calculated and represented in median survival time. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors that impacted survival outcomes. A clear margin was achieved in 88.8% of the 125 operated patients. Radiotherapy was given to 115 patients (62.84%). The survival shown in Kaplan-Meier curves was significantly lower according to advanced TNM stage, poor histologic grade, nonsurgical treatment, and patients treated with radical neck dissection. Radiotherapy was a good prognostic factor [hazard ratio (HR) 0.25, Surgical treatment can improve the survival outcome, whereas advanced stage and poor histological grading can worsen the overall survival. For oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma, radiotherapy was a good prognostic factor. On the contrary, a tumor with large vertical size, closed surgical margin, poor histologic grade, and radical neck dissection in the operated group were poor prognostic factors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma is the most common malignancy in the oral cavity. Overall survival varies across many countries, and poor prognosis is prevalent in developing countries, including Thailand. Our study aimed to identify prognostic factors that affected survival for oral tongue cancer in Thailand.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed a retrospective study of 183 patients diagnosed with oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma between January 2012 and December 2016 and who underwent multidisciplinary treatment. The disease stage was classified by tumor-nodes-metastasis (TNM) staging system. The survival outcome was calculated and represented in median survival time. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors that impacted survival outcomes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A clear margin was achieved in 88.8% of the 125 operated patients. Radiotherapy was given to 115 patients (62.84%). The survival shown in Kaplan-Meier curves was significantly lower according to advanced TNM stage, poor histologic grade, nonsurgical treatment, and patients treated with radical neck dissection. Radiotherapy was a good prognostic factor [hazard ratio (HR) 0.25,
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Surgical treatment can improve the survival outcome, whereas advanced stage and poor histological grading can worsen the overall survival. For oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma, radiotherapy was a good prognostic factor. On the contrary, a tumor with large vertical size, closed surgical margin, poor histologic grade, and radical neck dissection in the operated group were poor prognostic factors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34712546
doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003889
pmc: PMC8547936
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e3889Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Disclosure: The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this article. This study was supported by Khon Kaen University Research Fund (grant no.: IN62317).
Références
Br J Cancer. 2021 Jan;124(2):513-523
pubmed: 33041337
Oral Oncol. 2019 Mar;90:115-121
pubmed: 30846169
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2018 Jan 1;23(1):e23-e29
pubmed: 29274153
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Apr 17;69(15):433-438
pubmed: 32298244
Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015 Jul;24(3):379-96
pubmed: 25979389
Oral Oncol. 2008 May;44(5):446-54
pubmed: 17933578
Head Neck. 2010 Jun;32(6):714-22
pubmed: 19827119
J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Oct;39(5):207-16
pubmed: 24471047
Sci Rep. 2020 May 12;10(1):7877
pubmed: 32398670
Asia Pac J Public Health. 2015 Mar;27(2):NP47-57
pubmed: 23666841
Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Jul-Dec;9(2):364-370
pubmed: 31909017
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(10):5567-77
pubmed: 24289546
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2018 Feb;14(1):16-22
pubmed: 28816028
Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2008 Nov-Dec;74(6):861-866
pubmed: 19582342
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Feb 10;34(5):396-8
pubmed: 26644528
Anticancer Res. 2019 May;39(5):2527-2533
pubmed: 31092449
Cancer Manag Res. 2018 Oct 12;10:4523-4535
pubmed: 30349385
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(7):4335-8
pubmed: 23991999
Cancer Epidemiol. 2009 Nov;33(5):325-31
pubmed: 19853553
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Sep 1;32(25):2735-43
pubmed: 25049329
Mater Sociomed. 2017 Mar;29(1):30-34
pubmed: 28484351
Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2016 Jan 14;1(1):13-18
pubmed: 28894798
Laryngoscope. 2014 Mar;124(3):688-94
pubmed: 23945976
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Feb 10;34(5):427-35
pubmed: 26644536
Oral Oncol. 2009 Mar;45(3):201-11
pubmed: 18674959
J Dent Educ. 2001 Apr;65(4):328-39
pubmed: 11336118
Head Neck. 2014 Jun;36(6):811-8
pubmed: 23696499
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2011;12(10):2505-8
pubmed: 22320947
Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Aug;24(8):2781-2788
pubmed: 31732879